Holmes -v- Lingard and Others [2017] JRC 012 (16 January 2017)

Holmes -v- Lingard and Others [2017] JRC 012 (16 January 2017)

Given the risk of evidentiary overlap, potential for delay through appeals, and the longstanding nature of the dispute, the Master was correct to refuse a preliminary issue and direct that all matters be determined at trial.

Citation
[2017] JRC 012
Parties
Appellant: Harry James Lingard; Appellant: HJL Holdings Limited; Appellant: Angel Fish Limited; Respondent: Plaintiff (unnamed)
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
16 January 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Master's Procedural Order
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Preliminary Issues, Case Management, Appeals
Civil Procedure Preliminary Issues Case Management Appeals

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Harry James Lingard

Appellant

HJL Holdings Limited

Appellant

Angel Fish Limited

Appellant

Plaintiff (unnamed)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Master's Procedural Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the issue of settlement between the parties should be determined as a preliminary issue or at trial

Ratio Decidendi

Given the risk of evidentiary overlap, potential for delay through appeals, and the longstanding nature of the dispute, the Master was correct to refuse a preliminary issue and direct that all matters be determined at trial.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed; the issue of settlement will be determined at trial and not as a preliminary issue.